Re: Dennett's bad word and Johnson's question

From: Tedd Hadley (hadley@reliant.yxi.com)
Date: Mon Mar 27 2000 - 12:55:34 EST

Next message: Stephen E. Jones: "Re: Bone Study Suggests Ancestors Were KnuckleWalkers, etc"

Previous message: Steven M. Smith: "Re: Dating Old Rocks"
In reply to: Bertvan@aol.com: "Dennett's bad word and Johnson's question"
Next in thread: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Dennett's bad word and Johnson's question"
Next in thread: Richard Wein: "Re: Disbelieving Darwin and Feeling No Shame, by William Dembski"
Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

Bertvan@aol.com writes
  in message <75.27fa5c5.260e383d@aol.com>:
<snip>
> The truth is one doesn't even have to be religious to consider
> "random mutation and natural selection" a silly explanation for
> macro evolution.

   Why is this a silly explanation?

Next message: Stephen E. Jones: "Re: Bone Study Suggests Ancestors Were KnuckleWalkers, etc"
Previous message: Steven M. Smith: "Re: Dating Old Rocks"
In reply to: Bertvan@aol.com: "Dennett's bad word and Johnson's question"
Next in thread: Howard J. Van Till: "Re: Dennett's bad word and Johnson's question"
Next in thread: Richard Wein: "Re: Disbelieving Darwin and Feeling No Shame, by William Dembski"
Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 27 2000 - 12:55:27 EST